[PATCH 1/4] mark_tree_contents_uninteresting(): drop missing object check

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

It's generally acceptable for UNINTERESTING objects in a
traversal to be unavailable (e.g., see aeeae1b771). When
marking trees UNINTERESTING, we access the object database
twice: once to check if the object is missing (and return
quietly if it is), and then again to actually parse it.

We can instead just try to parse; if that fails, we can then
return quietly. That halves the effort we spend on locating
the object.

Note that this isn't _exactly_ the same as the original
behavior, as the parse failure could be due to other
problems than a missing object: it could be corrupted, in
which case the original code would have died. But the new
behavior is arguably better, as it covers the object being
unavailable for any reason. We'll also still issue a warning
to stderr in such a case.

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
 revision.c | 5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index 1cff11833e..ef70f69f08 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -52,12 +52,9 @@ static void mark_tree_contents_uninteresting(struct tree *tree)
 {
 	struct tree_desc desc;
 	struct name_entry entry;
-	struct object *obj = &tree->object;
 
-	if (!has_object_file(&obj->oid))
+	if (parse_tree_gently(tree, 1) < 0)
 		return;
-	if (parse_tree(tree) < 0)
-		die("bad tree %s", oid_to_hex(&obj->oid));
 
 	init_tree_desc(&desc, tree->buffer, tree->size);
 	while (tree_entry(&desc, &entry)) {
-- 
2.17.0.988.gec4b43b3e5